The context of Genesis 3:15

by pixel 15 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • pixel
    pixel

    Hello all. I just want to share my thoughts on Genesis 3:15.

    We all know the position of the WT/GB/FDS on this, that the woman represents heavenly organization (with annointeds, of course), the serpent Satan and everybody that is bad.

    But to me, the context says other thing.

    God is cursing the man, the woman, and the serpent.

    First, he starts with the serpent, and give it a pretty mundane curse: You are going to crawl. And will have hostility with woman's offspring.

    Then the woman: You will feel pain when giving birth.

    Then the man: You are going to work hard.

    From this curses, you can read they were pretty mundane. Simple put, they were curses. Now, how in the world the WT/GB/FDS takes this worlds from the middle of the conversation between God and the 3 and puts in a prophecy that involve them?

    That's beyond me, and its crazy.

    Thanks for reading.

    The verses in case you want to read them:

    14 And JehovahGod proceeded to say to the serpent:“Because you have done this thing, you are the cursed one out of allthe domestic animals and out of all the wild beasts of the field. Upon your belly you will go and dust is what you will eatall the days of your life. 15 And Ishall put enmitybetween youand the woman+ and between your seedand her seed.Hewill bruiseyouin the headand youwill bruise himin the heel.”

    16 To the woman he said: “I shall greatly increase the pain of your pregnancy;in birth pangs you will bring forth children,and your craving will be for your husband, and he will dominate you.”

    17 And to Adam he said: “Because you listened to your wife’s voice and took to eating from the tree concerning which I gave you this command,‘You must not eat from it,’ cursed is the ground on your account.In pain you will eat its produce all the days of your life. And thorns and thistles it will grow for you,and you must eat the vegetation of the field. 19 In the sweat of your face you will eat bread until you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken. For dust you are and to dust you will return.”

  • Vanderhoven7
    Vanderhoven7

    Pixel:

    Did the WT/GB/FDS actually say Gen.3:15 was somehow about them?

    If so, I'd like to see that in print.

  • leaving_quietly
    leaving_quietly

    @Vanderhoven7 - ask and you shall receive...

    it-2 p. 1198

    The “woman” of Genesis 3:15. At the time that he sentenced humankind’s parents, Adam and Eve, God gave the promise of a seed that would be brought forth by the “woman,” and who would crush the serpent’s head. (Ge 3:15) Here was a “sacred secret” that God purposed to reveal in his due time. (Col 1:26) Some factors in the circumstances existing at the time of the prophetic promise provide clues as to the ‘woman’s’ identity. Since her seed was to crush the serpent’s head, he would have to be more than a human seed, for the Scriptures show that it was not to a literal snake on the ground that God’s words were aimed. The “serpent” is shown at Revelation 12:9 to be Satan the Devil, a spirit person. Consequently, the “woman” of the prophecy could not be a human woman, such as Mary the mother of Jesus. The apostle sheds light on the matter at Galatians 4:21-31.—See SEED.

    In this passage the apostle speaks of Abraham’s free wife and of his concubine Hagar and says that Hagar corresponds to the literal city of Jerusalem under the Law covenant, her “children” being the citizens of the Jewish nation. Abraham’s wife Sarah, Paul says, corresponds to “the Jerusalem above,” who is the spiritual mother of Paul and his spirit-begotten associates. This heavenly “mother” would be also the “mother” of Christ, who is the oldest among his spiritual brothers, all of whom spring from God as their Father.—Heb 2:11, 12; see FREE WOMAN.

    It would follow logically and in harmony with the Scriptures that the “woman” of Genesis 3:15 would be a spiritual “woman.” And corresponding to the fact that the “bride,” or “wife,” of Christ is not an individual woman, but a composite one, made of many spiritual members (Re 21:9), the “woman” who brings forth God’s spiritual sons, God’s ‘wife’ (prophetically foretold in the words of Isaiah and Jeremiah as cited in the foregoing), would be made up of many spiritual persons. It would be a composite body of persons, an organization, a heavenly one.

    This “woman” is described in John’s vision, in Revelation chapter 12. She is shown as bringing forth a son, a ruler who is to “shepherd all the nations with an iron rod.” (Compare Ps 2:6-9; 110:1, 2.) This vision was given to John long after Jesus’ human birth and also after his anointing as God’s Messiah. Since it obviously has to do with the same person, it must have reference, not to Jesus’ human birth, but to some other event, namely, his being installed in Kingdom power. So the birth of God’s Messianic Kingdom was here pictured.

    Satan is shown later as persecuting the “woman” and making war with “the remaining ones of her seed.” (Re 12:13, 17) The “woman” being heavenly, and Satan by this time being hurled down to the earth (Re 12:7-9), he could not reach those heavenly persons of whom the “woman” was made up, but he could reach the remaining ones of her “seed,” her children, the brothers of Jesus Christ still on earth. In that way he persecuted the “woman.”

  • Rose Mary
    Rose Mary

    If earth is the center of universe,

    and if God has ego-problem;

    then you can bother about Genesis 3:15.

    Because Genesis 3:15 lies in the middle of the story of Adam and Eve, which starts claiming earth is the center of the universe (Genesis 2:4); and ends with showing God is having ego-problem (Genesis 3:22-24). Correct creation account is in Genesis Chapter 1 where it says mankind was created MALE & FEMALE simultaneously, in His image—something which Jesus confirms in Mathew 23:9

  • mP
    mP

    Rose;

    Dont twist the bible to say thing it does not say.

    Gen 2:4

    2:4 These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens,

    mP:

    No where in that sentence is the word center or anything remotely conveying the idea the earth is the center of the universe. It just says god created the universe.

    Thats the problem with the BIble, people constantly lie about what it says and this is a perfect example.

  • Rose Mary
    Rose Mary

    MP,

    The parallel creation account that starts in Genesis chapter 2 says woman is created out of man, and contradicts the science which teaches heliocentrism where sun is at the center, not the earth as implied in Genesis 2:4 “ God made the earth and the heavens.” [why the earth is put first? Because for the writer earth seems to be the center, which he thought as the truth! It was everybody's experience for 1000s of years, but was not truth.

    But Genesis 1:1 has got it correctly. “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth .” Here earth is put as part of the universe, which is correct!

    Yet you don’t coment on “God having ego-problem as inplied in Genesis 3:22-24!

  • mP
    mP

    Rose:

    I tried to point out your mis understanding and false claim about the earth being the center of hte earth. THe bible has a lot of mistakes in it, but to be fair dont go about inventing new ones which are clearly not there.

    I will quote 3:22-24 for everyone to read...

    3:22 And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us , to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:

    3:23 Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken.

    3:24 So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.

    mP:

    The problem is God didnt write or say that text. The concept of God in the Bible is a proxy for men with leadership. Everytime they want to make a statement they pretend god told them this or that or even better they point to some convenient passage invented by anotehr predecessor. In the middle east, only kings could afford gardens. Im sure we have all heard the hanging gardens of Babylon, the problem is we dont understand or apprcciate what a statement these gardens were making. The average person would have been very impressed by any garden given the dryness of their environment. Look at Israel its a dust bowl, its only bveen transformed in some places using modern machinery and technology. Befor ethat it was barren. The king in this statement is simply showing off his power to make a garden and the fact he had an education. The king doesnt want the lay man to be an individual he wants them to follow and serve him. A true god creator of the universe doesnt need lowly man, only another human would need slaves.

    This selfish motivation and concern for authority shows the text to be written by men for the benefit ofmen. Its all about authority and self interest.

  • Vanderhoven7
    Vanderhoven7

    Thanks L.Q.

  • punkofnice
    punkofnice

    When I was a Christian after I left the WBT$, I began to feel that the Genesis account of Adam and Eve was simply allegorical. Because it was the beginnings of society and was in the deep dark past that the tale had grown out of proportion down the years. So Gen 3:15 was pretty irrelevant. Yeah, I know. why were some bits of the Bible relevant and others not? Dunno. Probably to reduce the cognitive dissonance.

    That the WBT$ links it in with Revelation is typical of their deceitful pop theologian mentality. TBH a chimp could do that and make his own cult too!

    Now I am no longer a believer I don't give a monkeys cuss but it's nice to be able to recall how I used to think.

  • mP
    mP

    LQ:

    The only problem is jesus is never mentioned in the OT, and Satan does not appear in Genesis. YOu are making a lot of assumptions. If God really meant those figure sn the story he should have just used their names to make it clear and without confusion. There is nothing to be gained by hiding their identities. The siple answer is your assumptions are wrong. The A&E myth is unrelated to Rev etc.